Our discussion completely aside the answer will be whatever the federal
government deems it to be. I can think of nothing in life that is allowed
to exist or not exist without permission and regulatory guidance from that
level. The way it's evolved the local and state governments a) exist only
as an historically acceptable curiousity and act b) in accordance with the
dictates of the federal level. The real questions are not what or how you
and I think about things but how the national level will evolve, into what
and how much more we will see in our lifetimes. For example and going back
to state and local governments which now are little more than named sub
units of the national level become Departments and Sub-Departments of the
federal government with (first) names and numbers and (second) as numbers.
After all if citizens can be known by their federal name/numbers then why
not sub-political units.

The questions you should be asking to be relevant in the 21st Century a
Where is the capital of North American to be built? When the
NorthAmericanUnion is established from the NAFTA springboard will we end up
like the EC/EU with local laws, mores, culture, language remaining as is
and a national economy,monetary system, military defense etc? Will we
(Canada/USA) sink to the level of the Mexicans or raisethem to our standard
of living?

Get with the program . . . . .. history is useful only as a guide to what is
coming next.

M.





"Bob Crantz" wrote in message
ink.net...
Yes, but the Constitution never forbade blacks and women from voting.
The fact that in later Amendements "gave" the right to vote makes it
implicit that the right did not exist previously. The right to hold
political office is not subordinate to the right to vote. If that is so
then
women and blacks should not hold political office or legally can be barred
from it, unless the right is delegated in the Constitution (remember the
Equal Rights Amendment? If feminists say this must be passed for them to
be
equal, then there it is - it's perfectly legal to outlaw women from
holding
political office!).


"Michael" wrote in message
...
If memory serves the federal requirements speak to only age, and in the
case of a President place of birth. The rest per the (almost
defunct)
10th Amendment is left to the individual states. Two branches to follow
on
this topic. The requirement for birth in the US extends to all
those
listed in the Presidential Succession laws. Or does it? If some
office
is listed in the Presidential Line Of Succession does that not ipso
fact
mean those office holders must be US born or not be listed? Branch
Two
is
the discussion of impeachment or replacement by whatever meansof a
state
elected representative or senator (representative at large) to the
federal government. Let's assume a Senator, such as Bob Packwood of
Oregon
(R) or Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts (D) was 'recalled' as some
states
have the right to do or otherwide legally removed from office by their
home state and prior to the normal end of their term. What would
happen?

M.


"Bob Crantz" wrote in message
ink.net...
The 19th Amendment "gave" women the right to vote, and the Civil
Rights
Amendment "gave" blacks the right to vote, which implies that these
are
enumerated rights granted by the Constitution, then where does it say
that
women and blacks have the right to hold political office?

Robert Kranz